. today we saw officially just an unprecedented filibuster of defense secretarynomineechuckhagel. isthis the worst you've ever seen in congress? >> well, you know, we always say it's the worst. the republicans are just having a hard time. they got their bell rung, and they're trying to fight against hagel, who is actually a republican. mccain seems to be trying to figure a way to get out of this. this thing with rubio last night was just a first-class mess on their part. karl and the tea party are fighting with each other. you know, it's going to take them a little while to figure out where they're going. but right now they're just all confused and don't quite know what way to go. and all they can do is say just the same thing. if you look at rubio, it's the same speech you've heard for the last 30 years. it's nothing there. >> americans get -- i think are upset about this. that's not the term i'd like to use on tv. i'd be a little more brash abou. across the country. number one, they're going on vacation for a couple weeks when we've got this thing looming on march 1st, the seq

secretarynomineechuckhagelaskinghim to clarify something he may or may not have said back in 2007. well, graham explains the letter's content on fox news sunday. >> there was a blog posting about a speech i think in 2007 or '08 that chuck hagel made at rutgers university and put on his blog the next day six points of the speech. question-and-answer session, and point six was allegedly senator hagel said the u.s. state department was an adjunct of the israeli foreign minister's office, which i think would be breathtaking if he said that. >> okay. so let's see if we're all on the same page here and have this correct. a right-wing website publishes a resumer from a blog based on something hagel may or may not have said in a speech over, count them, five years ago. and now sitting united states senators are demanding hagel explain himself. hagel provided ayotte and graham with a copy of the speech and notes he does not recall making any such statement. now, folks, this is a pattern for the new gop that maybe mr. viguerie is looking for. senator rand paul pushing a theory about moving guns f

. >> this is a clipfromchuckhagel's hearingyesterday. listen to senator james inhofe's source for his information. >> there is an article the other day in the "washington post" by jennifer rubin called "our dim witted state department." it's kind of an interesting article. >> michael, how do you get these guys to stop listening to the same wild conspiracy theories? they just live in a different world. >> i think it is a little bit of a different world in that sense. i don't get -- i don't get the direction and the messaging that the party is putting out this right now. i really honestly don't. i think that we really need to sort of step back from this thing and really assess exactly what do we need to focus on. is benghazi of all the things that are pressing the american people right now something that as a national party we should be fixated on. hillary clinton, yes, she served as secretary of state. did an admiral job. most people would say that. yeah, there was this hiccup with benghazi. we unfortunately lost the lives of four u.s. servicemen out there, ambassador and the like. so how do we no

. and for that reason, there is people,includingchuckhagel, whoare supportive of drone technology, because it minimizes u.s. risk. but that -- that is a separate conversation. the operation conversation is separate from the legal one. and i think there is more information that is needed to figure out just exactly how we determine who is an imminent threat, who is an al qaeda operative. how do we make those determinations? who is involved in making the determinations before we launch the drone strike. i think those are very weighty questions that deserve more of a public hearing. >> well, the number of strikes versus the bush administration, colonel, very different. obviously, this is how the obama team wants to execute the war on terror. and the broad range, you're okay with it. but what do you tell innocent folks that get killed or an american that might be hit by a strike inadvertently? >> well, there is nothing you can say about that. war is a messy business. even technologically precise war like this. you raise an interesting point about this president. the first month he was in office

Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)